I was watching a documentary about WWI, and it made the point that the French were still using bright red-and-blue uniforms early in the war, which made them clearly visible to the German artillery. It got me thinking about how camouflage would have been an advantage to any army in history, right? Even while using Napoleonic combat tactics, surely being camouflaged wouldn't hurt?

So my question is, were camouflaged uniforms ever used in wars pre-WWI, say, during Napoleonic wars or even before? Did they offer an advantage? And if so, why didn't opposing armies copy them sooner?

And a related question: how about modern combat tactics? I have this picture in my head of Napoleonic armies, standing in large groups opposing each other and firing in huge volleys. Would an army using modern combat tactics (but not modern rifles and equipment), easily defeat them?

When I researched on Wikipedia (sorry guys), all I found was that the official Roman census ended around 22 CE. But a reading I'm doing on Constantine and the early Roman empire mentioned that Roman Census data that was lost will never be recovered. The only I have with the book is that it was a statement made in passing, so I'm not sure if it was just an assumption. Can anyone help me out?

I'm having an exam in a few weeks and I'm aiming for higher grades. The books my teacher gave me were pretty low on information. I've already researched on some sites but I wasn't really happy about what I found. Thanks in advance!

And is it fair to say that a war or revolution is the most common way for a nation to gain independence and that peaceful political negotiations are the exeception?

In particular the battle scenes featuring thousings of men and hundreds of ships?

I've read about it very briefly in my world history textbook, and I got interested so I tried to do a little research. However, while I got a lot of facts, there wasn't much talking about the overall effects or the "big picture."

Or was there cooperation that most of us just aren't aware of? Sorry if this is too far into "what if" territory for this sub. Thanks!

In Ode 18 it describes all the great 'acts' he did and the myth of Theseus becoming king includes a lot of monster slaying and such.

Did people in Athens see him as just an old king or as the monster slayer, or both?

Mostly, I am interested in what was the real cause of the cold war. I read that it mostly has to do with ideological differences, and started in world war II, but I don't get how it all ties together. Also, why was there a big push to contain communism by the US?

What sort of fighting force were in terms of doctrine and how they fought during ww2

To forestall the obligatory "medieval is too vague" comment, let's say early 1200s England, with the caveat that I'm down to here about other times and places if you have info.
So, was your typical noble actively involved in the day to day administration of villages they ruled, decided things like what to plant, where to build new structures etc. or were they basically extortionists who would just once in a while ride through, say "pay you taxes or else", but otherwise didn't really care what went on? Or was it somewhere in between? Let's assume that this is a relatively small property.

Aside from the wartime conferences with the Allies and a brief stay with Lenin in London prior to the revolution, did Stalin ever travel outside the Soviet Union?

I was talking to a family friend, who made the point that when the british withdrew from their colonies, they left behind better functioning governments than other european powers, and as a result had a better quality of life. Is there a historical basis to this?

I am doing a presentation on the rise of Basil I from peasant to Byzantine emperor and i have found a lot of information, but i can not find any info that says whether the act of cutting off the hands off Michael had any significance. I know that the Byzantines would practice mutilation to eliminate a rival, as they could not claim the throne while mutilated, but why bother doing that if you are just going to kill your rival anyway?

I would like someone to recommend to me a book about the Italian Unification . Somewhere between 100 to 300 pages and that book just focuses on the Unification process.

In our society today, death and horrors are a strange occurrence. It's not something you experience every day. Those that do, such as soldiers and first responders, often experience PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder).

My question is, in older times from as early as 1700s all the way back to ancient civilizations, where death and war was much more common and widespread, did people back then experience PTSD? Or is it more of a social thing? Does the strangeness and randomness of it in today's society cause PTSD?

What about for ancient warfaring societies like the Mongols, Spartans, or Vikings, where they were raised to fight and kill? Did those soldiers experience PTSD, or did they grow up around it enough for it not to matter?

The closest things I've seen are Century series craft like F-104 and F-105, which are more interceptors/strike craft than real fighters. The navy had the F-4 and A-8, but what did the USAF have?